ChuanqiXu added a comment.

In D130689#3684333 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689#3684333>, @thieta wrote:

> In D130689#3684330 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689#3684330>, @mehdi_amini 
> wrote:
>
>> What does it mean exactly? We can't use **anything** C++17 without writing 
>> it in the coding standards?
>> I'm not sure it'll be manageable: how do you see this playing out?
>
> Probably poorly worded - what I was trying to convey is that if we want to 
> use a C++17 feature that's really impactful on the syntax/readability we 
> should probably consider recommending ways to use it in the coding standards, 
> similar to our guidelines on using for() loops 
> (https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#use-range-based-for-loops-wherever-possible)
>  or the auto keyword 
> (https://llvm.org/docs/CodingStandards.html#use-auto-type-deduction-to-make-code-more-readable).

So it is free that developers want to use some C++17 features in a small amount 
of code, right?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D130689

_______________________________________________
lldb-commits mailing list
lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits

Reply via email to